Reliability and validity of bifactor models of dimensional psychopathology in youth.
Reliability and validity of bifactor models of dimensional psychopathology in youth.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/abn0000749
复制
发表时间：
2022-05
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Salum, Giovanni Abrahao
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Scopel Hoffmann, Mauricio;Moore, Tyler Maxwell;Kvitko Axelrud, Luiza;Tottenham, Nim;Zuo, Xi-Nian;Rohde, Luis Augusto;Milham, Michael Peter;Satterthwaite, Theodore Daniel;Salum, Giovanni Abrahao
双因素模型是一种很有前途的策略，从青年精神病理学的具体方面解析一般。目前，有多种配置的双因子模型源于不同的理论和经验的角度。本研究旨在以儿童行为量表（CBCL）检验不同精神病理双因素模型的信度、效度、测量不变性及相关性。我们使用了来自可再现脑图（RBC）倡议的数据（N= 7，011，年龄5至22岁，40.2%为女性）。使用基线数据对因子模型进行了检验。为了实现我们的目标，我们a）使用CBCL搜索已发布的项目级双因素模型; B）测试其全局模型拟合; c）计算基于模型的可靠性指标。d）测试与症状在日常生活中的影响的关联; e）测试许多特征的测量不变性，以及f）分析在模型中观察到的因素相关性。我们发现了11个双因子模型，从39到116个项目。他们的全球模型拟合大致相似。在大多数模型中，P因子、内化因子、外化因子和体细胞特异性因子的因子确定性和H指数是可以接受的。然而，在所有模型中，只有p-和注意力因素预测了日常生活症状的影响。模型在不同的特征之间具有广泛的不变性。P因子在模型间高度相关（r = 0.88至0.99），同型特异性因子高度相关。这些结果表明，无论项目选择和策略组成CBCL双因素模型，他们评估非常相似的结构。总之，我们的研究结果支持了p因子在不同双因子模型和不同特征研究中的稳健性。
Bifactor models are a promising strategy to parse general from specific aspects of psychopathology in youth. Currently, there are multiple configurations of bifactor models originating from different theoretical and empirical perspectives. We aimed to test the reliability, validity, measurement invariance, and the correlation of different bifactor models of psychopathology using the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). We used data from the Reproducible Brain Charts (RBC) initiative (N=7,011, ages 5 to 22 years, 40.2% females). Factor models were tested using the baseline data. To address our aim, we a) searched for the published item-level bifactor models using the CBCL; b) tested their global model fit; c) calculated model-based reliability indices. d) tested associations with symptoms’ impact in everyday life; e) tested measurement invariance across many characteristics, and f) analyzed the observed factor correlation across the models. We found 11 bifactor models ranging from 39 to 116 items. Their global model fit was broadly similar. Factor determinacy and H index were acceptable for the p-factors, internalizing, externalizing, and somatic specific factors in most models. However, only the p- and attention factors predicted daily life symptoms’ impact in all models. Models were broadly invariant across different characteristics. P-factors were highly correlated across models (r = 0.88 to 0.99) and homotypic specific factors were highly correlated. These results suggest that regardless of item selection and strategy to compose CBCL bifactor models, they assess very similar constructs. Taken together, our results support the robustness of the p-factor across distinct bifactor models and studies of distinct characteristics.